4 ms·
Thanks! I do this all the time too :) . Makes for a more pleasant / less cluttered experience on sites I use a lot. I'll add that another thing that is pretty
by ronjouch 3y ago
Thanks! I do this all the time too :) . Makes for a more pleasant / less cluttered experience on sites I use a lot.
I'll add that another thing that is pretty easy to do is to add a Dark Mode to websites that don't have one. All you need is a userContent.css/uBlock rule like
@media (prefers-color-scheme: dark) {
body {
background-color: #111 !important;
color: #eee !important;
}
/* etc, more stuff here depending on site */
}
, and ta-da! Dark mode respecting your OS dark/light setting based on pref or time of day :)
- notpushkin 3y agoDark Reader extension does basically this (I think they either change colors or add the invert filter depending on what looks better?), but also has builtin CSS override rules for many sites. Love it.
- ronjouch 3y agoSure. I prefer to minimize depending on more extensions (for futureproof-ness, performance, security). These days, { uBlock Origin, Vimium } is all I need :)
- notpushkin 3y agoThat's a nice approach! I try to maintain a practical balance here, my extension list is basically: GreaseMonkey, Stylus, uBlock Origin, Consent-o-Matic, Dark Reader and maybe a couple more. In theory, one can use uBlock0 for everything (with CSS and I think also JS injection), but userstyles and userscripts are way easier to use sometimes. And you can reimplement Dark Reader with userstyles, but you'll have to keep track of various site-specific tweaks to make it look good. (Should be possible though! Might be a cool idea for a pet project.) But I understand the concerns with having too many extensions from too many different authors, yeah.
- mig4ng 3y agoThanks for sharing. I don't use Dark mode but someone might be interested in this!